We watched F1: The Movie starring Brad Pitt, an adrenaline-fueled ride through racing, drama, and spectacle. Here’s our full verdict.
Starring Brad Pitt and guided by Lewis Hamilton, F1 blends real racing with cinematic flair, but is it too polished to thrill?
Anticipated as much as it was feared by fans of the sport, F1: The Movie comes with a colossal budget, a star-studded cast (led by Brad Pitt and Damson Idris), and none other than Lewis Hamilton serving as a special advisor. The question was: would it deliver a visually stunning spectacle… but one that’s overly glossy and hollow, disappointing both film buffs and diehard F1 fans alike? That’s the $200 million question.
Following the Paris premiere we attended last night, it’s safe to say: yes, F1 is a very Hollywood film. But despite a few clichés, conveniences, and liberties, “Hollywood” in this case feels more like a strength than a flaw.
Brad Pitt stars as Sonny Hayes, a former Formula 1 driver from the 1990s who raced alongside the likes of Michael Schumacher and Ayrton Senna. Now, coming out of retirement, he lines up against Charles Leclerc and Yuki Tsunoda.
After winning the 24 Hours of Daytona (a successful opening sequence), Sonny is contacted by his friend Ruben Cervantes, the owner of the Apex Grand Prix team (APXGP), a fictional outfit reminiscent of Caterham. Ruben asks him to mentor a promising young driver, Joshua “Noah” Pearce, played by Damson Idris.
F1 is undeniably Hollywood—and that’s where its greatest strength lies. Visually speaking, and this is immediately obvious, the film is breathtaking. Thanks to miniature cameras mounted directly on the cars and the cinematographic finesse of Claudio Miranda, the immersion is stunning—it really feels like you’re there. The racing scenes are a clear triumph: the sensation of speed and intensity is striking. It’s all the more impressive considering much of the footage was shot during warm-up laps. Hats off to the crew.
Off the track, the film delves into the behind-the-scenes world of the sport with a blend of informative detail, earnestness, and fan enthusiasm. Even during race sequences, there’s a clear effort to explain tire management, strategic nuance, and aerodynamics. The paddock, hospitality zones, factory life, wind tunnels, sponsor pressures, and omnipresent media are all convincingly depicted—if sometimes simplified. Both newcomers and F1 veterans will feel immersed.
A “Hollywood” Storyline—For Better and For Worse
Hollywood’s influence is also felt in the screenplay, both its strengths and shortcomings. The star-powered cast is led by Brad Pitt, whose undeniable charisma often overshadows Damson Idris. However, Pitt occasionally overplays the “wounded old warrior” persona, bordering on self-parody.
The film’s flaws—like its strengths—stem from its Hollywood DNA. Familiar tropes abound: the haunted veteran returning to action, the gifted but impulsive rookie with an overprotective mother, and the obligatory shady financier. Predictable and a bit too easy.
Though the plot occasionally takes unexpected turns, it largely plays it safe. And yes, the inevitable romantic subplot is easy to spot a mile away. After a fast-paced and even exhilarating first half, the film drags in its second, with about 20 minutes (out of 155) that could have been trimmed without loss.
Still, the script features sharp, effective writing at times, with well-crafted dialogue that elicits genuine laughter. The film also pokes fun at Liberty Media’s relationship with Netflix and even paints the FIA as either incompetent or clueless—something many fans will appreciate.
Accuracy vs. Storytelling: The Film’s Core Dilemma
For purists, the movie contains several moments that defy logic or realism. From questionable race strategies to implausible engineering feats—like a tech director designing a game-changing part in two weeks—the film stretches credibility. There’s even a scene where a driver competes despite blatantly failing a medical check. But the most unrealistic? Sonny Hayes returning after 30 years and immediately performing at elite level—no seat fitting, no simulator time, no adaptation period.
And yet—does it really matter? The film never pretends to be a documentary. Some simplifications, such as APXGP having only a dozen team members, are clearly designed to help viewers connect with the characters and follow the story more easily.
It’s also fair to acknowledge the film’s thoughtful nods that only true fans will catch: a sly glance from Fernando Alonso to Pearce after a race won with clever strategy (no spoilers), or well-placed lines like “and through goes Hamilton,” and the standout quote from the team’s technical director: “My job is the wind.”
In general, fans will feel a real thrill exploring the sport’s inner workings, as well as its history—like the subtle reference to Martin Donnelly’s crash. Cameos from Frédéric Vasseur, Günther Steiner, Zak Brown, and Toto Wolff are amusing, though ultimately minor. Current drivers play no acting roles, likely for image reasons, with the focus squarely on the APXGP duo.
A Blockbuster—and So What?
Despite its narrative shortcuts and technical liberties, F1 is a well-made piece of entertainment. Visually stunning, it generally strikes a strong balance between thrilling immersion and broad accessibility—though it does lose momentum midway through.
Newcomers will likely be captivated by the strategic depth of the sport—that’s the goal, after all. Hardcore fans, on the other hand, may wish for more substance. But let’s be clear: this film does not take its audience for fools. Immense effort has gone into the production, and you absolutely get your money’s worth.
In short, F1 is a production that—despite its flaws—manages to surprise, engage, and entertain. It’s very Hollywood, both in the best and worst senses. But the positives outweigh the negatives. And frankly, before the lights went out, we feared the opposite.
To sum up: not a win, but definitely a podium finish.